Allahabad Court November 1954 Judgments
The State Vs. Krishna Murari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-26-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All397; 1955CriLJ1025
Kidwai, J.1. Krishna Murari Lal was suspected in black-marketting in cement. Accordingly on 17-9-1952, sub-Inspector Masoom Hussain of the enforcement squad, sent one Mohmmad Hanif with two notes signed by Circle Inspector Mehtab Singh, one for five rupees and one for two rupees to purchase a bag of cement. Mohammad Hanif accordingly purchased one bag of cement for Rs. 6/8/-, paid with the signed notes and received eight annas back. When the bag was being loaded on to a riscksha, the Sub-Inspector along with the Circle Inspector who had followed came out of concealment. They took over the cement and the eight anna bit from Mohammad Hanif and questioned the accused. The accused admitted having made the sale and produced the two notes signed by the Circle Inspector. He was released on bail and a complaint was filed against him on the same day under paras. 4 and 6 of U. P. Cement Control Order read with Section 6, U. P. Control of Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act of 1947.2. The case procee...
Tag this Judgment!Baba Pawan Das and anr. Vs. Uttar Pradesh Government
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All415
Randhir Singh, J. 1. This is an application in revision under Section 115, Civil P.C., against the order of the Civil Judge, Sitapur, dismissing an application for permission to sue in forma pauperis. 2. It appears that the applicant filed an application for permission to sue in forma pauperis under Order 33, Rule 1, Civil P.C. Notice was issued to the Government and to the opposite party and on the date of hearing of the application the learned Civil Judge dismissed the application on the ground that the suit was barred on the principle of res judicata. The applicant had, it is admitted, instituted a suit for a declaration of his title to the property which was the subject-matter of the dispute in the suit which has given rise to this revision. That suit was ultimately dismissed on the ground that the applicant had omitted to sue for possession. It was after the earlier suit had been dismissed that the applicant, along with one other person, made an application for permission to sue i...
Tag this Judgment!Ch. Harpal Singh and ors. Vs. Lala Hira Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All402
Raghubar Dayal, J.1. This is an appeal by the judgment-debtor against the order rejecting his objection to the decree-holder's application for execution of the decree by his arrest.2. The decree-holder applied on 29-11-1950 for the execution of his decree for over Rs. 6,000/-by the arrest of the judgment-debtor, mentioning in the application that he had already realised Rs. 1,574/6/-. On this application notice was ordered to be issued to the judgment-debtor. When the judgment-debtor appeared in court, he put in an application stating various reasons why he should not be arrested in execution of the decree. He was examined on his behalf and stated on oath that he had no intention not to pay the decree-holder. He was cross-examined by the decree-holder and it came out during cross-examination that he had sold certain property to the co-operative societies under two sale deeds, one for Rs. 2500/- and another for Rs. 4,000/- and that out of this amount, which the got for the sale of the p...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Niwas Vs. Election Tribunal at Lucknow and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All251
Randhir Singh, J.1. This petition for a writ of certiorari, prohibition or any of her appropriate writ is directed against the Election Tribunal of Lucknow and the members thereof and also some other persons.2. It appears that in the bye-election to the U. P. Legislative Assembly, Budaun. North Constituency, the petitioner was elected a member of the U. P. Legislative Assembly. An election petition was thereafter instituted before the Election Tribunal for the setting aside of the election on various grounds mentioned in the application made before the Tribunal. After the application came up for hearing, the petitioner made an application for the amendment of the lists and paragraph 4(a) of the election petition. The main ground on which amendment was asked for was that some matters had been left vague and some particulars had not been given. The Election Tribunal ordered the petitioner to furnish better particulars and to make his allegations definite in certain matters and the petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Salik Ram Upadhia Vs. B. Jai Gopal Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All350
Malik, C.J. 1. This is an appeal on behalf of the defendant-appellant against a decree passed by the learned Civil Judge of Sultanpur. The points raised in the case were not very difficult but the learned Judge got lost in the number of authorities that were cited before him and appears to have come to an entirely erroneous conclusion. 2. on Thakur Rudra Pratap Singh, Taluqdar of Rampur, had borrowed a sum of money from one Salik Ram on 10-5-1932. Thakur Rudra Pratap Singh died issueless on 3-5-1933. He, however, left a widow surviving him, named Thakurain Sri Nath Kuar. On 14-10-1930, he executed a will which contained the following provision about his wife if he died issueless: 'That Thakurain Sri Nath Kuar will be the owner of the entire taluqa and all the move-able and immoveable properties etc., mentioned above as the widow of the Hindu family provided she leads a moral life. Thakurain Saheba aforesaid shall have no right to transfer the immoveable property. Till the life-time of ...
Tag this Judgment!Central Distillery and Chemical Works Ltd., Meerut Vs. Commr. of Incom ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-23-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All167; [1955]27ITR100(All)
Malik, C.J. 1. These are two connected references, one of them being under Section 66(2), Income-tax Act and the other under Section 21, Excess Profits Tax Act. The facts given in the statement of the case as also in the Appellate Order of the Tribunal related only to the Income-tax reference and no facts have been given as regards the reference made under Section 21, Excess Profits Tax Act.2. The two questions that have been referred to us for decision are as follows :'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case the sum of Rs. 34,582/- could be claimed by the assessee company as an expenditure laid out and expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case the expense so claimed wasan expenditure in the nature of capital and hence not admissible under Section 10(2) (xv), Income-tax Act?'3. The assessee is a company known as Central Distillery and Chemical Works Limited, Meerut, incorporated un...
Tag this Judgment!Sadi Ram Ganga Prasad Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-23-1954
Reported in: [1955]28ITR316(All)
MALIK, C. J., and MOOTHAM, J. - In the year 1947 a reference was made to this Court under section 66(I) of the Indian Income-tax Act and the question referred to us was as follows :-'Whether in the circumstances of this case the loss of Rs. 10,000 arising out of the loss of title and possession of the house under the High Court decree dated 26th October, 1943, during the accounting year was a revenue loss admissible under the provisions of section 10(2)(xi) or a capital loss.'The reference came up before a Bench of this Court on the 17th of December, 1951, and, in view of the provisions of section 10(2)(xi), the Bench asked for a further statement of the case. On the 13th of October, 1952, the Tribunal sent up a further statement of the case and it has now re-framed the question as follows :-'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case the loss of Rs. 10,000 arising out of the loss of title and possession of the house property under the High Court decree dated 26th Octob...
Tag this Judgment!Jethmal Parasram Vs. Commr. of Income Tax, Delhi, East Punjab and Ajme ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All176
Malik, C.J. 1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) Income tax Act but in view of certain decisions of the Supreme Court it is not necessary for us to give our reasons at any length.2. The assessee was assessed to income tax on his status of an individual and as a resident in British India. The assessee carried on business in cloth in Ajmer in British India which was the Head Office and at two branches at Kishangarh in an Indian State. These branches made purchases of cloth in British India for sale inside the State. The purchases made were of considerable amount. In the assessment year 1942-43 the total cloth purchased in British India was for Rs. 1,24,118/- and in the next year 1943-44 for Rs. 1,91,148/-. The Income-tax Officer considered that purchase of cloth in British India for sale outside amounted to part of the operations for making profits, being carried out in British India, and applying the provisions of Section 42 (3), Income-tax Act added 10 per cent, on the total valu...
Tag this Judgment!Mahadeo Prasad Vs. Sheo Dass
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All352
Randhir Singh, J. 1. This is an application for revision which was originally instituted as a second appeal but was later treated, at the request of the appellant, as an application for revision arising out of proceedings under the Insolvency Act.2. It appears that the applicant filed an application under the Provincial Insolvency Act for adjudging the opposite party an insolvent and the act of insolvency, which was alleged on behalf of the applicant, was that the opposite party, who was a partner in business with the applicant had not paid the profits which were due to the applicant on account of the business.3. The application was resisted on behalf of the opposite party on the ground that such an application was not maintainable, firstly, because no relationship of creditor and debtor existed and secondly that the amount claimed was in the nature of unliquidated damages and as such the application was barred under the provisions of Section 9(1)(b), Provincial Insolvency Act.4. The C...
Tag this Judgment!Shital Prasad and ors. Vs. Deputy Accountant General (S.R.) Accountant ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All623
ORDERM.L. Chaturvedi, J.1. These are two connected petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioners are employed as class IV employees in the office of the Accountant General, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad. They formed a Union known as the 'Fourth Class Employees Union' and they selected as their office bearers some persons who were not employed in the office of the Accountant-General. The Deputy Accountant General took exception to the formation of this Union and on 16-9-1952 he issued notices to some of the employees in class IV including the petitioners. The notices run as follows:'It has been explained to yon that you cannot be a member of a Trade Union. You are hereby directed to resign from such a union and inform the undersigned of your having done it within a couple of days.'The petitioners did not inform the Deputy Accountant General that they had resigned from the Union, and on 19-9-1952 he issued further notices calling upon the petitioners to answer the cha...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »